Chris Coldwell (NaphtaliPress) has published Presbyterian & Reformed books since 1987. He is the editor of The Confessional Presbyterian journal, an annual publication containing scholarly articles from a Confessional Presbyterian perspective by men from the many conservative Presbyterian & Reformed denominations today. He has a particular interest in the text of the Westminster Standards, and a critical text of the Larger Catechism is running serially in the journal beginning with the 2007 issue.
A Critical Text of the Westminster Larger Catechism 2: The Authoritative Editions
Posted 09-11-2007 at 08:48 AM by NaphtaliPress
A Critical Text of the Westminster Larger Catechism: Q. 1–50
The Authoritative Editions
The Larger Catechism was first published by itself, and Bower lists eight early printings between 1647 and 1649. Only two of these are to be considered authoritative, because they are the only ones to have likely allowed involvement of the Assembly scribes in the proofing process. The two authoritative editions printed privately for the use of the Westminster Assembly and Parliament are
AMa. The humble Advice of the Assembly of Divines … concerning a Larger catechisme (London: Printed by A. M., [1647]). Bower’s Edition One.
AMb. The Humble Advice, etc. With the Proofs thereof out of the Scriptures (London: Printed by A.M, 1648). Not in Wing. Bower’s Edition Four.
In this article Bower’s Edition One is denoted as AMa, and Edition Four as AMb. The example consulted for AMa is the copy available through Early English Books. The base text from which work was begun for this collation was compiled from the example of AMb available from Old Paths Publications. However, Bower does note some problems with the Old Paths edition. He compared the text to the original at Princeton from which it was made and discovered the digitizing process created changes in the text. “The changes involve actual word changes, number changes and the loss of scripture reference markings. One curious word change was the result of a hole in one page which allowed the text from the page beneath to appear. Most of the changes were probably due to digital manipulation which was designed to enhance the appearance of the text” (Bower, 52 n11). The text presented here has been collated against Bower’s text as a check against the inclusion of these defects in the text, which he numbered to be “at least twenty-five.”
While initially the Larger Catechism was published singly, it quickly began to be paired with the Shorter Catechism and the Confession of Faith. Subsequently the lineage for the traditional text of the catechism tracts exactly with the editions given for the Confession of Faith traced in “Examining the Work of S. W. Carruthers.”
In addition to the early texts that were consulted, the primary popular editions collated for the Scottish text were the following:
1. MAX (A. Maxey: 1658)
2. RTHb (London: Printed by S. Griffin, 1658)
3. THIRD (London: Parkhurst and Newman, 1688)
4. Watson (Edinburgh: Watson, 1708)
5. Cox (London: Cruttendun & Cox, 1717)
6. DNLP (Edinburgh: Watson, 1719–21)
7. L&Ra (Edinburgh: Lumisden & Robertson, 1728)
8. L&Rb (Edinburgh: Lumisden & Robertson, 1736)
9. L&Rc (Edinburgh: Lumisden & Robertson, 1744)
10. E.Rob (Edinburgh: E. Robertson, 1756)
11. 1771np ([n.p.], 1771)
12. KNCDa (Edinburgh: Kincaid, 1773)
13. KNCDb (Edinburgh: Kincaid, 1781)
14. KNCDc (Edinburgh: Kincaid, 1788)
15. Kerr (Edinburgh: Kerr, 1793)
16. Blair (Edinburgh: Blair and Bruce, 1803–41).
17. Orr (Glasgow: Orr, 1842)
18. J&Ha (Edinburgh: Johnstone & Hunter, 1851)
19. J&Hb (Edinburgh: Johnstone & Hunter, 1855)
20. J&Hc (Edinburgh: Johnstone & Hunter, 1867)
*21. Mair (Edinburgh and London: Blackwood, 1914)
Important editions which fall outside the lineage of the traditional text may have had some influence, and these are mainly if not exclusively the Reformed Presbyterian editions. Other editions outside the lineage have also been occasionally consulted. For more information on all of these, and the many American editions, see Endnote A. Endnote B presents some remarks on the origin of the different scripture proof sets and the first editions in which they appear. Endnote C presents some more detailed notes on variants in the American Scripture proofs presented in the Table.
Continued: Critical Remarks
*I just noted the table above got completely mis-numbered as it went to press, so much for auto-numbering, or the lack thereof. The journal is not in print and I have my first errata entry for 2008.
I have corrected the numbering in the presentation here.
The Authoritative Editions
The Larger Catechism was first published by itself, and Bower lists eight early printings between 1647 and 1649. Only two of these are to be considered authoritative, because they are the only ones to have likely allowed involvement of the Assembly scribes in the proofing process. The two authoritative editions printed privately for the use of the Westminster Assembly and Parliament are
AMa. The humble Advice of the Assembly of Divines … concerning a Larger catechisme (London: Printed by A. M., [1647]). Bower’s Edition One.
AMb. The Humble Advice, etc. With the Proofs thereof out of the Scriptures (London: Printed by A.M, 1648). Not in Wing. Bower’s Edition Four.
In this article Bower’s Edition One is denoted as AMa, and Edition Four as AMb. The example consulted for AMa is the copy available through Early English Books. The base text from which work was begun for this collation was compiled from the example of AMb available from Old Paths Publications. However, Bower does note some problems with the Old Paths edition. He compared the text to the original at Princeton from which it was made and discovered the digitizing process created changes in the text. “The changes involve actual word changes, number changes and the loss of scripture reference markings. One curious word change was the result of a hole in one page which allowed the text from the page beneath to appear. Most of the changes were probably due to digital manipulation which was designed to enhance the appearance of the text” (Bower, 52 n11). The text presented here has been collated against Bower’s text as a check against the inclusion of these defects in the text, which he numbered to be “at least twenty-five.”
While initially the Larger Catechism was published singly, it quickly began to be paired with the Shorter Catechism and the Confession of Faith. Subsequently the lineage for the traditional text of the catechism tracts exactly with the editions given for the Confession of Faith traced in “Examining the Work of S. W. Carruthers.”
In addition to the early texts that were consulted, the primary popular editions collated for the Scottish text were the following:
1. MAX (A. Maxey: 1658)
2. RTHb (London: Printed by S. Griffin, 1658)
3. THIRD (London: Parkhurst and Newman, 1688)
4. Watson (Edinburgh: Watson, 1708)
5. Cox (London: Cruttendun & Cox, 1717)
6. DNLP (Edinburgh: Watson, 1719–21)
7. L&Ra (Edinburgh: Lumisden & Robertson, 1728)
8. L&Rb (Edinburgh: Lumisden & Robertson, 1736)
9. L&Rc (Edinburgh: Lumisden & Robertson, 1744)
10. E.Rob (Edinburgh: E. Robertson, 1756)
11. 1771np ([n.p.], 1771)
12. KNCDa (Edinburgh: Kincaid, 1773)
13. KNCDb (Edinburgh: Kincaid, 1781)
14. KNCDc (Edinburgh: Kincaid, 1788)
15. Kerr (Edinburgh: Kerr, 1793)
16. Blair (Edinburgh: Blair and Bruce, 1803–41).
17. Orr (Glasgow: Orr, 1842)
18. J&Ha (Edinburgh: Johnstone & Hunter, 1851)
19. J&Hb (Edinburgh: Johnstone & Hunter, 1855)
20. J&Hc (Edinburgh: Johnstone & Hunter, 1867)
*21. Mair (Edinburgh and London: Blackwood, 1914)
Important editions which fall outside the lineage of the traditional text may have had some influence, and these are mainly if not exclusively the Reformed Presbyterian editions. Other editions outside the lineage have also been occasionally consulted. For more information on all of these, and the many American editions, see Endnote A. Endnote B presents some remarks on the origin of the different scripture proof sets and the first editions in which they appear. Endnote C presents some more detailed notes on variants in the American Scripture proofs presented in the Table.
Continued: Critical Remarks
*I just noted the table above got completely mis-numbered as it went to press, so much for auto-numbering, or the lack thereof. The journal is not in print and I have my first errata entry for 2008.
I have corrected the numbering in the presentation here.
Total Comments 0
Comments
Recent Blog Entries by NaphtaliPress
- Articles on the 1903 Revisions of the Confession of Faith by Murray and Stonehouse (09-22-2008)
- The Meaning of "Psalm" in the Westminster Standards (03-22-2008)
- John Brown of Wamphray:Singing of Psalms, Hymns and Spiritual Songs 2 (03-11-2008)
- The Westminster Directory for Public Worship and Lining of the Psalms (11-18-2007)
- John Brown of Wamphray: Singing of Psalms, Hymns & Spiritual Songs in Public Worship (10-07-2007)
